Woman gets tased, hand-cuffed, and arrested for "not wearing a mask."

Exactly what stops people from buying a "service dog" vest on eBay and bringing their dog everywhere: not a damn thing.

 

They probably don't want to be killed. They'd rather not have meth planted in their cars. They may not want to move to a different state.

 

Mask enforcement rules are unconstitutional and this woman was not within 6feet. Was this woman being removed from private property per the request of the owner due to her violating their rules or was this a public area?

I am against how Floyd was treated even though he was being arrested for legit reasons.

 

agree, or tinted front windows, you have to show the cop medical proof or you're getting a ticket, at least here

 

You are right up to a point. First the rules were published by the Governor's office about a month prior to the event. Those rules contained an exception that would cover someone with an asthma condition. Now, if the School board, or the school itself chose to impose stricter rules that did not allow exceptions, then they would have to be clearly published prior to the event, and posted in plain sight at the event itself. If these steps have not been taken, then any stricter rules can not be enforced. Further, a stricter set or rules would be a clear violation of the American Disabilities Act (ADA) that requires venues to provide accommodations for those with disabilities. The Governor's rules obviously takes the ADA into consideration. Rules that requires everyone, no matter their disability, to wear masks at all times is a violation of the act.

As far as the police officer is concerned. My first thought was that the officer did not understand that the official rules allowed an exception for this woman for asthma, and was making the arrest based on a misunderstanding of the law. It is possible that the instructions from his superiors did not take exceptions to the mask mandate into account. In other words, the officer was told to remove or arrest every refusing to wear a mask. Either way, if this woman does have asthma, they could not have legally arrested her.

One other point on this issue. The event in question happened on Wednesday, September 23rd. More then 4 days ago. Yet, we have heard nothing from this lady since then. No statements to the Press. No, published Facebook post. No Tweets. Why? I think that this might prove that this woman does not actually have asthma, and that she just did not want to wear a mask. In which case, she is guilty as charged. But it could still highlight a flaw in the police's process.

 

But I thought the cops were always right ?

 

I am against how this officer acted. Although ridiculous to not just wear a mask, this is excessive. But at the end of the day, rules are rules. Right ?

We as a society dont get to pick and choose what laws we follow, and what laws we don't. In this case the officer had a right to arrest her, but it was excessive.

But this thread is just filed with irony

 

Nice dodge Blues. Your tendency to denial is much greater than your tendency to rational analysis.

 

The scamdemic analysis is a bit more complex than you might like. Way more complex than the garbage numbers you cite.

 

It would seem that the Governor, himself, does not know what is in his rules. Nothing in the rules states that if a mask can not be worn, then you have to use a face shield. Further, the statement from the Doctor about whether a person suffering from asthma can wear a mask is mute. Both the Governor's Mask Mandate and the OHSAA rules merely exempts breathing issues. Of course that could forceably include a sinus infection or a case of the sniffles, but it is what it is. If the Governor wants to remove asthma from the exemptions, or require face shields for anyone covered by a mask exemption, then he has to amend the rules to say so. Until then, any arrests would be unlawful, and would not stand up in court.

My wife's oldest son, who lived with his father, came to visit us twice a year while I was in the Marines. He suffered from well controlled asthma, but was still required to carry an inhaler with him at all times. On one occasion, I was stationed at 29 Palms, CA and they were holding an outdoor concert on the base football field. We were not there more the 10 minutes when he suffered an attack. He had trouble getting his inhaler out of his pocket, and started to panic. I helped him get the inhaler out of his pocket, and tried to help him use it. Even though he had used the inhaler for years, he was panicking too much to control his breathing to use it. So, the paramedics had to step in. Would you like to know what triggered the attack? A freshly mowed field. Based on that experience, I would support a asthma sufferer not wearing a mask. Sometimes, with a sudden and violent attack, a person may not have the additional time of removing a mask or face shield. Just my personal opinion.

The Kitts incident illustrates what is behind the whole mask protests and confusion. It began with the original statements by the WHO, CDC and Dr. Fauci that masks are only necessary for those that are sick or are treating the sick. I understand that the statements were designed to ensure masks were available for healthcare workers, but it caused confusion. If masks were not necessary then, then why are they necessary now. These people have not worn masks all along, and they do not have any symptoms. So, they believe that masks are not necessary, and just one more government intrusion. I myself have questioned whether the rules were changed based on political pressure and not a medical necessity. But, I have 75 year old wife that has COPD and high blood pressure. I wear a mask to ensure that I do not bring anything home to her. The last thing I want is for her to get sick. So, I take precautions.

So, the medical community has created doubt about the necessity of masks, and now the Governor of Ohio has created confusion about his own rules. You can understand that people might rebel under these circumstances.

 

Rules are rules AS LONG AS those rules have a legal constitutional foundation. Mask ordinances do not have such a foundation, and neither do ordinances that require citizens to wear other sorts of clothing. Orders to wear certain types of clothing are something from religions and religious orders, but not from a secular government.

 

What else was he supposed to do when she refused to leave and she got belligerent?

 

If you want to debate whether mask are effective or not there are threads for that, if you believe they violate some right you think you have then petition your governor, your state board of health, your county board of health, your school board and get the mandates and rules changed. I go to my kids games and we all wear mask and if you don't you are told to put one on or leave the stadium............PERIOD. If you are claiming and exemption then be prepared to prove it. And the mandates and rules also state that if you are suffering symptoms you should not go at the least.

 

Im guessing you think he should have kneeled on her neck until she died

 

Unfair and untrue.

Blues has at least been consistent.

 

I doubt this is true. Has anybody challenged the constitutionality of mask mandates?

 

I got my dog a "Therapist" vest. If I am ever questioned, I will point out that it says "The rapist"!

 

A federal judge in western PA ruled in favor of the plaintiffs who had sued the PA governor's lockdown order. I'm not sure whether masks specifically were mentioned, but all his other stuff related to the lockdown was ruled unconstitutional.

 

People have been quarantined. I remember some woman during the W Bush years, so I'm guessing masks are constitutional. Lockdowns are something else.

 

They should. Then we can apply it to clothing.

 

Lol. There's a beach at Lake Tahoe for that.

 

I see. That's why you shared. LOL.

 

You left out the part where she knew the rules beforehand, wore a mask to get in, then removed it afterwards, knowing this was the wrong thing to do. You left out the part where she was told by several different people in positions of authority at different times to wear her mask, and she refused them each time. You left out the part where she gave the Officer lip and refused once again to wear her mask. You left out the part where she physically resisted his efforts to lead her away from the stands. You left out the part where she resisted the large Officer sufficiently to thwart his efforts to control her and he had to resort to the use of a taser. You left the truth out because it didn't fit your false narrative. It wasn't tyranny. You're just a liar.

 

People with disabilities need to eat and take public transportation. They don't need to spectate at a football game. So I don't think that the disabilities act would cover her in the circumstance of a pandemic.

 

For the record, she was hand-cuffed and tasered for refusing to leave the property and resisting arrest, it was not because she was violating the mask rule.

Let me put it to you this way, many businesses have a "no shirt no shoes no service" rule. One would not be arrested, handcuffed, or tasered for violating this rule, however if the establishment with said rule were to ask you to leave for not abiding by their rules, and you refused, they would be within their rights to have the police remove you from the property, and if you still refused THEN you would be subject to being handcuffed and arrest, and if you resisted arrest, THEN you might be subject to being tasered

Establishments have been allowed to kick people off of their property who violate their rules since our country's foundation, the only difference in this incident is it was a rule put in place for the public's safety